Land Acquisition – National Highways Act, 1956 – Section 3-J – Solatium and interest – Applicability of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Acquisition of Ac.43.89 cents in various survey numbers of Badampudi Village, Unguturu Mandal, for widening of NH-5 (Km 80–152) made under the National Highways Act, 1956. Held, in view of Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 9 SCC 304, as clarified in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 235, provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 relating to additional amount under Section 23(1-A), solatium under Section 23(2) and interest under Section 28 proviso apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act; Section 3-J is to that extent violative of Article 14 and unconstitutional. Therefore, landowners whose lands were acquired between 1997 and 2015 under the National Highways Act are entitled to 30% solatium and statutory interest in terms of the Land Acquisition Act. (Paras 9–10, 12–13)

A. Land Acquisition – National Highways Act, 1956 – Section 3-J – Solatium and interest – Applicability of Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Acquisition of Ac.43.89 cents in various survey numbers of Badampudi Village, Unguturu Mandal, for widening of NH-5 (Km 80–152) made under the National Highways Act, 1956.
Held, in view of Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 9 SCC 304, as clarified in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 235, provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 relating to additional amount under Section 23(1-A), solatium under Section 23(2) and interest under Section 28 proviso apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act; Section 3-J is to that extent violative of Article 14 and unconstitutional.
Therefore, landowners whose lands were acquired between 1997 and 2015 under the National Highways Act are entitled to 30% solatium and statutory interest in terms of the Land Acquisition Act. (Paras 9–10, 12–13)

B. National Highways Act – Retrospectivity – Period 1997–2015 – No classification between acquisitions

Clarification sought before Supreme Court on whether Tarsem Singh operates prospectively only, rejected.
Held, to confine operation prospectively would perpetuate an arbitrary classification between landowners whose lands were acquired just before 01-01-2015 and those acquired just after, offending Article 14. Decision in Tarsem Singh held applicable to acquisitions under the National Highways Act for the entire period 1997–2015, and solatium/interest cannot be denied merely because original awards or arbitral orders did not grant them or the claim was not specifically urged at that stage. (Paras 10–11)

C. Arbitration – Section 3G NH Act – Reference to Arbitrator (District Collector) – Challenge under Sections 30 & 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Natural justice

Contention that arbitrator (District Collector) failed to give opportunity of hearing after claim petitions were filed, allegedly violating principles of natural justice.
Held, appellants failed to show any material that such a specific ground was raised before the Principal District Judge under Sections 30 & 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act or that the Court had ignored it. In absence of such material, plea of violation of natural justice cannot be entertained for the first time in appeal. (Paras 6–7)

D. Compensation – Enhancement by Principal District Judge – Further modification by High Court

Competent Authority/RDO fixed market value at ₹1,40,000 per acre (award dated 19-03-2003).
On reference under Sections 30 & 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Principal District Judge, West Godavari, enhanced compensation to ₹1,45,000 per acre, granted benefits under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act and solatium @ 15% of market value.
High Court:

• Affirms market value of ₹1,45,000 per acre and other directions of Principal District Judge;

• Modifies solatium to bring it in line with Land Acquisition Act, awarding additional 15% solatium, so that total solatium becomes 30% of market value, together with applicable interest on the enhanced solatium. (Paras 4–5, 12–13)

E. Result

All Civil Miscellaneous Appeals disposed of by affirming the orders of the Principal District Judge, West Godavari, subject to modification that appellants are entitled to an additional 15% solatium on market value with corresponding interest.
No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions closed. (Paras 13–14)